Apple has filed a lawsuit against Samsung, accusing the electronics giant of …

Share this story

Apple is continuing its crusade against competitors that it believes are ripping off its ideas. The company filed a lawsuit against Samsung on Monday, alleging that the electronics giant violated Apple's intellectual property in its Android-powered devices like the Galaxy Tab, Nexus S, and Epic 4G.

"Rather than innovate and develop its own technology and a unique Samsung style for its smart phone products and computer tablets, Samsung chose to copy Apple's technology, user interface and innovative style in these infringing products," reads the complaint seen by the Wall Street Journal. (The lawsuit doesn't yet appear to be in PACER, and Apple did not respond to our request for a copy of the complaint.)

The Journal's writeup is short on details, but we believe Apple's complaint is referring to Samsung's "TouchWiz" user interface, which (among other things) lays out the device's apps in a grid of icons. The app drawer is particularly Apple-like, and a brief discussion about TouchWiz among the Ars staff left us in agreement that TouchWiz is toeing the line in its mimicking of iOS.

Apple's language when describing Samsung's alleged follies is reminiscent of the language used when Apple sued Nokia for patent infringement. In December of 2009, Apple said that Nokia had "demonstrated its willingness to copy Apple's iPhone ideas" when creating its own devices. More recently, Apple went after Amazon for using the term "App Store," arguing that Amazon is riding on the tails of Apple's success.

There's no doubt that Apple is applying the same logic to Samsung's own UI choices. The iPhone (and increasingly the iPad) are Apple's headline products now, and the company has shown a continued willingness to sue competitors who use what it considers to be its own innovations.

Share this story

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

I am normally against lawsuits of this nature, but Apple might have a real case this time. TouchWiz is a blatant ripoff of Apple's UI. I think it was designed to attract iPhone users that wanted to switch from AT&T (before the Verizon iPhone was available).

The app drawer is particularly Apple-like, and a brief discussion about TouchWiz among the Ars staff left us in agreement that TouchWiz is toeing the line in its mimicking of iOS.

Honestly? Really?

I'm not just looking at the fact that the implementation in TouchWiz is VASTLY superior to Apple's pathetic offering. You honestly think that "arranging application shortcuts in a grid of icons" is patentable? Prior art? How about Windows-fucking-95?

A grid of icons covering your desktop.. There's nothing new about that.

80% of the windows users in the world have a desktop which looks entirely like that since they say 'yes' to every app they install creating a desktop icon, and windows automagically arranges them on a grid.

How the hell is that a patentable UI? aren't there like 20 million desktops worth of prior art already out there? The only difference is that the screen is smaller so the grid is smaller..

What would the current state-of-the-art look like if this behavior was allowed in the last century? Ford Motor Company is suing GM for blatantly ripping off it's steering wheel interface. Rather than innovating and developing their own interface, they chose to copy the decades of R&D needed to create...a wheel. Apple is pathetic (as is every other patent abuser).

The app drawer is particularly Apple-like, and a brief discussion about TouchWiz among the Ars staff left us in agreement that TouchWiz is toeing the line in its mimicking of iOS.

Honestly? Really?

I'm not just looking at the fact that the implementation in TouchWiz is VASTLY superior to Apple's pathetic offering. You honestly think that "arranging application shortcuts in a grid of icons" is patentable? Prior art? How about Windows-fucking-95?

+++++

Okay, correct me if I'm wrong, and as I don't own an Android phone right now, I might be, but doesn't EVERY Android-based phone use a "grid-like" layout for their icons?

And as far as the "dock" (which you didn't mention, but clearly looks like an iPhone)... ahem, BLACKBERRY??

This shit is getting as bad as the 70s-era lawsuit guitars: next thing you know, the only thing you'll be able to patent is the phone's shape, Apple, so be careful how much you bitch.

I'm losing respect daily for these guys who try to claim they came up with things that are natural designs; they literally already exist in nature, you're simply applying them to a phone.

Try patenting something that's actually original, Apple.

**EDIT** Forgot something: PALM. Yep. Palm Pilot. First hand-held device with a vertical, (roughly) 16:9ish aspect ratio screen with icons arranged in a grid-like fashion (the first one I can think of, anyway).

This isn't a good case if your fighting against software patents. This case said their software is not protected by copyright adequately, and they need to patent the interface. The outcome of this case probably was the biggest cause of the shitty software patents we have to deal with today.copyright != patent

Didn't Apple users used to mock the wall of icons that Windows users frequently had on their desktop? Didn't "look and feel" utterly fail in court? I hate all of these stupid lawsuits; I don't care if their actual patents have more details that somehow make them "valid". It's likely that Samsung copied the look of the iPhone; that way it was more comfortable for the people they wanted to lure away. It's still not a freaking iPhone, and doesn't have iTunes and Apple's store and doesn't use their actual code. Boo yet again to Apple for this legal FUD.

According to All Things D, Apple is not just complaining about the user interface but also the shape of the hardware. Apparently only Apple may make tablets and phones that are rectangular with rounded corners:

I think they were also going for the shape too. Its shaped almost exactly like an iphone with the same rounded corners, earphone size, prominent center bottom button, and grid of icons. Im not an apple lover here (WP7 user) but it clearly tries to have the 'look and feel' of the iphone.

I'm guessing apple was awarded a design patent for the iPhone's UI and Samsung's TouchWiz is a bit too similar. I'm also guessing if they simply laid off all the black, they might not have had a problem.

FWIW, I opened the article and my first thought was "why are they showing the *back* of the Samsung phone for comparison next to the *front* of the iPhone?!" ...took me a second to notice the logo on the left-hand device...

The UI copying goes beyond a "grid". It's basically copied element by element. Both grids share the same dimensions (4x4) and feature a four icon dock at the bottom, sized the same as the icons in the grid. The icons are all squares (not circles or app dependent shapes). Both use dots to denote what page you are on (but Samsung moved theirs to the top).

The physical design of the phone pictured is also remarkably similar to the 3GS. From the metal band, to the symmetrical spaces above and below the screen, and even the location of the ambient light sensor. People say the iPhone copied the LG Prada, but Samsungs phones borrow a lot more elements from the iPhone than the iPhone does from the Prada (design of the icons, size of the grid, design of the dock (if thats even a dock on the Prada), and the prominence given to the home button are all different).

I'd say both Samsungs TouchWiz UI and the physical design of their phones blatantly copied Apple, however I'm unsure of what the legal ramifications should actually be. How much of the design should they really be allowed to protect? Most things are inspired by prior art, but blocking them all would put an end to innovation.

Apparently for Apple, a "rectangular design with rounded corners, similar black border and array of icons" is what constitutes patent infringement. The good old US patent system seems to be broken as ever, even as several other countries, including the EU, rule that software cannot be patented.

The patent system may be broken but in this case it is behaving as intended. The purpose of patents is to encourage and drive innovation. I find it disgusting that Samsung copied Apple's UI as-is in an attempt to lure people switching from iOS. As such, they need to pay.